Philosophy of the Ellimist Chronicles

[wotw2112]

Let me begin by saying this very well may have been discussed elsewhere.  If that is the case, feel free to delete this topic (preferably after directing me to where I can find the other topic).

One of my favorite books from the Animorphs universe is undoubtedly the Ellimist chronicles.  This is in no small part due to the philosophical underpinnings that (in my opinion) pervade much of the book.  Boiled down, it seems like Applegate is exploring the possible idea that "god" is a gamer. 

I've put a lot of thought into this and have come up with more than a few pros and cons but in the interest of not coloring the conversation, I'd be interested to know if anyone has any thoughts on the merits of this regarding its potential applicability to our world (such as it is).

I'd even like to here if you think it's just a ridiculous theory (but please add a why).

[Oceanspray]

Yes, God is a gamer.  He was bored and this is his game.

Imagine you're an omnipotent being.  You are alone in an empty space by yourself.  So you create a world to play in.  Then you create an intelligent npc to play with.  But that's not good enough, you'll get bored with the same npc after a while.  So you create another npc that allows them to create more of themselves.  You didn't create the new creatures so you won't know what they will do.  Suddenly your little world becomes more and more interesting as you add different races of people all over the world.  And what better way to keep your game from getting stale than by making the people die over time.  Always someone new to play with!  Oh and let's make pain, ignorance, and incompetence recurring themes in the majority of people, because we know a healthy, informed, and skilled person will be boring to watch or play with because a healthy/informed/skilled person is predictable.  And give the people false hope by using your avatar to promise them a better place after they die!  So much fun as they worship you, kill each other in your name, and build statues and buildings dedicated to you.  You get all of their praise and glory and give nothing in return, fun fun!

^Note the tone of this; If it's a game to God, it sure isn't a game from my perspective.  May not be what you were looking for, hope it helps.


Oh and you said
>here
>not "hear"
Just sayin'!

[RYTX]

Flip it.
Gamers are gods

gods-still lower case, referring to being vastly beyond human capabilities in a domain.

I think the Ellimist-God doesn't work when considering God as an all powerful, unbound entity that can do anything, and the source or substance of everything.

Rather we must compare to gods of old: The god OF fire, god OF the seas, god OF death.
No mortal could match their prowess within a gods domain, but the gods themselves are gods of a certain thing, not all.
Again and again it's said the Ellimist, has his limits. He can do a lot, but he is not all powerful.
He has more domains, can play with time and matter and species, but he has rules and constrictions, self imposed or otherwise, in the way of other gods. Even Zeus could not change fate.

It's a human with an ant-farm, you can do a lot, change them home, squish em, but your bound by, time, physics, morals, ethics and laws etc. You can be godly, but really, your not God.
And so it is with the human games: your sims or whatever. You can do a lot. But all you're really doing is playing with the toys you have. You seem powerful, but only from the limited perspective of the what's available

I think overall she was careful not to introduce a God character-a character that could do ANYTHING, and that's the difference between God and god of, imo. By nature, gaming makes you a god OF. That's part of why we do it. I think that's the parallel, because that's what's understandable. A God, is incomprehensible. A god is just playing with, we can understand, even if we don't sympathize.

[wotw2112]

Oceanspray,

Exactly the kind of thing I was looking for (and sorry about the typo - it's been a long tax season so my brain isn't fully functioning yet).

It seems like you're proposing one of two things.  Either:

A.) "God" is amoral.  He created us so he can do what he wants with us as is his right.  This has the least readily available objections (as their is no universal mandate that I'm aware of that says god has to be good), or

B.) He's the 5-year-old with a magnifying glass and just doesn't know any better. 

I tend to lean towards the latter of these points as - even if one assumes "all-powerful" to avoid further arguments re: "is this entity really god?" - that doesn't mandate "all-knowing".  In all likelihood creation started similar to the way a writer starts a book.  Boredom (as you said) and an idea with no clue where it might lead.

Another interesting point you made seems to coincide with the christian concept of "creating in his own image".  He creates things that can create in their own right therefore losing some measure of control (which is a good justification for anyone who wants to argue for a benevolent god).

Using the gamer mentality I think it's most likely that he just kind of got bored and "wandered off" to do other things and left us here to sort ourselves out.  Hell of a job we've done.

Rytx,

I know it's not a perfect parallel.  A good point that he is "a god" rather than "the god".  However, I believe (and correct me if I'm wrong - it's been a while) that it is mentioned in the  Chronicles that the Ellimist and Crayak can pretty much do anything but quickly realized that would just destroy the entire universe so they agreed on certain rules.  I don't see self-imposed rules as potentially limiting an entity from being all-powerful.  In fact the capacity to create such rules is actually almost a necessity of being truly all-powerful.  But I'm digressing...

I just think the Ellimist screws with fate all the time (albeit in very subtle ways - i.e. pausing time to show the Animorphs a way out that they otherwise might not have seen) so the parallel might not be that far off.

[RYTX]

The Ellimist and Crayak admit that unrestrained, they could destroy the entire universe-including them, but that only details the low of their power.

As said in TAC "I saw the Ellimist himself, as he really was. An indescribable being of light and time and space. Huge, but without a place. Alone, but not the only one of his kind. I saw and understood the vast power that trailed the lines of time through his grasp. And yet, against the enormity of all that had ever been and all that would ever be, I saw his limits, too.
The Ellimist was mighty. But not all-powerful"

And the Ellimist himself admits in 26 ""I thought you were all-powerful," Rachel said. The Ellimist smiled. "No. I seem so only from your limited perspective.""

He's can do "anything" with in human comprehension- comprehension limited by laws of nature, an individual lifetime of experience, and a collective learning of only a million years or.
The Ellimist exist outside those limits, our limits, but that's not to say he doesn't have his own limits beyond that. The greatness of strength is a matter of perspective, not absolute. Hell, he can't even guarantee how the future unfolds.


He agreed to the game to hold back Crayak; he would have been content to watch time proceed, Crayak would not.
Which is why, I think, it lends more to "what you're playing makes you godly" rather than "being godly means you're playing a game"

[wotw2112]

I stand corrected.  To a degree.  As I'm not entirely certain what kind of "god" is in charge of our own world (i.e. an all-powerful being or some being who just seems all-powerful to us) I can't rightly say whether your argument is on point or a bit beyond what I was considering...

As I am more interested in the philosophy itself at the moment let's operate under the assumption that being capable of anything within the realm of human understanding constitutes a god for our purposes.  That said, any thoughts on the concept of a god like the Ellimist as it might apply to the real world?

[Noelle]

I am in the same ball-park of thought as RYTX.  The only reason the Ellimist, or any other person/being/animal seems like a God is because they have capabilities/understanding we don't have.  But, in this universe (or any parallel universes) they are bound by rules, whether it's physics, quantum mechanics (which is still...physics...) etc.


I think that KAA used the Ellimist as a cleverly disguised deus ex machina tool, however, due to the fact that she gave him a very thorough background as the gamer, the person who is immortal/very very powerful, yet still bound by rules, it is debatable whether he IS deus ex machina at all.  The reason why I would argue that it is is because, when your readers have no choice but to accept that their minds are too small to comprehend the rules that the god plays by, it basically is DeM.


Overall, I am agnostic in thought and atheist in practice, it basically boils down to this:

a) if god is a gamer, then he is just a being that is more powerful than us and that's it.  Any "rules" he may apply are only to control the game as he sees fit.  And if he felt the need to intervene if his people went wrong (aka, all the religious wars etc) then he would.  He doesn't, so he either a) doesn't care or b) we're a big scientific project to see just how long humans will take to annihilate the world, or if HUMAN gamers will step up to protect it.  And if we wait for god to swoop down and fix us all and save us all and rapture us all, we're all going to be thoroughly thoroughly disappointed, and anyone who is out there convincing you its going to happen is either dumb or has an alternate agenda on their mind.  (I wonder how much money Mr. The Rapture is Going To Happen Twice This Year I Promise made...)

or

b) God is truly a God, and he knows everything and anything anyway.  He knows the heart of all the people, he knows their intent and their will.  He knows whether they will change for good or ill, he knows whether they do good in life or not.  No rules will change that, you are evil or you aren't.  What the hell good do rules of "go to church X times a year and do X amounts of Ys" do?  They don't do any good at all because if your heart isn't in it, and your actions don't match your facade of belief, it isn't going to buy you a place in *insert realm here* anyway.


So, overall, in the end, it doesn't matter.    The best we can do is play the IRL game of life the best we can and wait to see the outcome.

[Aquilai]

What I'm finding interesting is the way people answer this post. Some think we're toys, some think we're abandoned, some think we're an experiment or that everything is part of a grand plan. All guesses with the assumption that Earth is (or was) the focus of someone's doing. Another mentioned point of view: "God is unknowable". One of the things I usually lol at. If he's so mystical and his ways impossible to fathom how can anyone with any certainty say he wants you to go to church, say grace etc. Where did these rules come from?

The idea of god being a gamer isn't any more or less credible than the view that life is a game. It's a point of view. I would say that everyone is a gamer whether they know it or not. A reason why people have issue with the point of view that life is a game is because they think a game isn't something to be taken seriously. In the same way if god is a gamer then human life is less significant. Calling God a gamer humanises something supposedly sacred and we all know how flawed humans are.

I don't really believe in an all-{insert preferred adjectives} God but I do believe there could be more advanced people (or beings) than us. Aside from the obvious "there is always a bigger fish" and "the universe is so vast". Something terrestrial that makes me believe this is the way a lot of modern computer games are often compared with how realistic it is. It is theoretically possible we are all just virtual gamers unaware we are in a virtual space. You could say that the developers might be god (lower case for RYTX's benefit) but often players will discover bugs or things that were meant to be hidden. If you are religious then you could say they were left for us to find. An example of these things could be the existence of blackholes which were predicted by the Schwarzchild radius before they were ever discovered.

Personally, I think the world (by extension universe/multiverse) is infinite which makes this meta-game the most open-ended possible. The goal of reality is up to the players. Do Sim characters all have a endgame goal? We could just be gamers inside a game developed by a gamer who is also playing inside a game ad infinitum. In short, to me, yes god could be a gamer who developed the game we play in or he is on a completely different level but I would view everyone as an unknowing gamer.